I'm a former IC ZZL/P Mod = AMA

[StrangePackage]

Again... I have absolutely no issue with homosexuals. As I said previously, I was for gay marriage before Obama was.

The fundamental meaning of abnormal applies to homosexuality...feelings or not. If a poll were posted, I doubt that any honest person, if given the option to describe homosexuality as normal or abnormal, would pick normal.

deviating from what is normal or usual

homosexuality is a deviation from what is normal or usual.

So then you'd be comfortable labeling homosexual behavior as deviant?

 

[StrangePackage]

I gotta say, these exceptionally long discursive discussions featuring super and sunny that I completely skip over have really cemented this board as the successor to the ZZLP.

It's like we never left.

 

[superrific]

sunnyheel = concentration camp survivor

It's more like sunnyheel = "someone trapped in a bus station for an hour and compares his plight to Auschwtiz."

Or maybe sunnyheel = "someone who plays basketball at UNC, wins a national championship, gets drafted in the NBA lottery and still refers to his time in Chapel Hill as prison."

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

It's unreal how people are taking shots at SnoopRob without even bothering to consider the issue from his perspective. Or even having any perspective.

Try an experiment. Listen to Nirvana's Nevermind album, and then listen to their debut album Bleach. Notice something? Nevermind has much better sound quality. That's probably related to another fact, which is that Bleach cost like $3000 to make and Nevermind well over 100K. But I like Bleach and I listen to it. Part of that experience is accepting that the sound quality isn't going to be great. The sound quality, after all, is connected to one of the great things about that album: it was pure Nirvana, with no corporate oversight or mainstream producers trying to make Nirvana sound kind of like a heavier R.E.M.

So too with the ZZL. It was a free message board, and the moderators were unpaid. You're not going to get Nevermind quality moderation. That's not because the moderators suck or couldn't do better if they were professionals; it's because they were volunteers and doing the best they could within the commitment that could be reasonably expected of them (not to mention cross-currents from above). They were giving Bleach-quality moderation.

And, like the Bleach album, the low cost was an integral part of the ZZL's appeal -- namely, that it was free and anyone could post. I would not have posted on the ZZL if it cost money, and I'm guessing that's true of many other posters. So if you ever liked discussing issues with me, or learning from me, or teaching me -- well, that benefit came with the cost of volunteer moderation. I think it was a good trade or I wouldn't have posted. Sunnyheel sure seemed to enjoy boxing with me (either that or he was a masochist), so for him to complain about the imperfections in moderation is basically ridiculous. It's like going to your local Mexican cantina and complaining about the lack of a tasting menu.

As I try to catch up in this thread, I'd like to thank super for the sidetrack of going and checking out Nirvana's Bleach album. Soooo takes me back to what every college band was trying to do back in my undergrad days of the early to mid 90s...

 

[superrific]

As I try to catch up in this thread, I'd like to thank super for the sidetrack of going and checking out Nirvana's Bleach album. Soooo takes me back to what every college band was trying to do back in my undergrad days of the early to mid 90s...

Negative Creep remains my favorite Nirvana song.

FWIW, the rumors going around indie rock world back then (even before Nevermind) is that the record was supposed to be called "Blecch", but Sub Pop nixed it, and thus "blecch" was the proper pronunciation of the album's title. This was told to me in person by Maynard from Tool, who I interviewed for my college radio station. I don't take his word as gospel, both because he could have been just repeating rumors or just fucking with me, but there it is.

Incidentally, as that interview was concluding, the band's H showed up and Maynard offered me a turn on the needle. It remains the only time in my life I have ever seen it up close and personal. What I wanted to say was, "I don't do H, and even if I did, I wouldn't share a needle with your dirty ass, no offense," but what I actually said was "no thanks." Sigh. I'm pretty sure Maynard would have appreciated my comment and thought it funny, but I was too scared. It's a regret of mine. Not among the top 100 or top 1000, but I do wish I had said something different. It was my only chance to diss a big rock star to his face and laugh about it, and I blew it.

 

[Wolfslayer]

Is anyone at all surprised by the fact that folks who have been banned in the past nearly universally disagree they should have been banned in the first place?

Do we think another potential universe might exist where they're all sitting around going "Whelp, yup, I totally deserved that!"?

I had two aliases banned for calling out TarheelPatriot on his fuckery and asshattery. It was worth both aliases.

 

[hedge]

Incidentally, as that interview was concluding, the band's H showed up and Maynard offered me a turn on the needle.

I wonder if he would've let you have a bump if you'd asked for that instead...

 

[superrific]

I wonder if he would've let you have a bump if you'd asked for that instead...

Well, I would never have done it. I vowed to myself as a teenager to stay away from all opiates forever unless absolutely necessary, and I've lived up to it. When I shattered my kneecap last year, I declined the painkiller in the ambulance because it was opiate. It fucking hurt like hell every time we went over a bump, but such is life.

 

[ZenMode]

So then you'd be comfortable labeling homosexual behavior as deviant?

Sexual deviance is much more subjective. There's nothing homosexuals do, sexually, that heterosexuals don't do.

Some people might call specific sexual acts, none of which are unique to homosexuals, deviant.

 

[finesse]

I didn't turn down the painkillers when I had all my teeth pulled, including the surgery to remove the broken roots (legacy of too much fun with amphetamines in my youth) but didn't have anything but Tylenol after I had the trach. Not an aversion, just a preference. I wanted to get out of the hospital, I wasn't leaving until I had a bowel movement and opiates lock me down.

Found that out early. There was a lot of opium and/or opiated hash coming back from Vietnam and I managed to run into my fair share. It was a really pleasant buzz but it was the wrong direction for me . I also didn't care for the constipation.

 

[hedge]

Well, I would never have done it.

I was more wondering if he would've refused a request for a bump b/c he thought that would be wasting it but I guess there's no way to answer that at this point...

 

[4thgenheel]

"Typically" isn't "always" and adding an emotional factor does negate the core meaning.

nonsense.

arguing that Oxford and Merriam Webster are wrong and you're actually right about what words mean is definitely a winning argument.

just a stunning lack of self awareness.

 

[SnoopRob]

Clever but the analogy works like this:

The IC Hive = Nazis
Snoop = kapo
sunnyheel = concentration camp survivor

If you ever find yourself comparing yourself to a concentration camp survivor due to something that took place on an internet message board, you should probably just step away from the keyboard.

 

[superrific]

I was more wondering if he would've refused a request for a bump b/c he thought that would be wasting it but I guess there's no way to answer that at this point...

Oh. Nah. There would be no reason for him to diss someone from a college radio station (which is where most of the grunge bands got their first airplay). It's not that I had a lot of pull anywhere, but it couldn't possibly be worth it for him to even run the risk that I'd be offended, and then I'd get on the air and say, "I interviewed Tool, but they were assholes to me, completely dicks, and I'm not going to bother with the shitty interview." Surely a band with videos on MTV wouldn't sweat a bit of H.

 

[ZenMode]

Again, the word you are looking for is atypical, not abnormal -- that is, if you're trying to talk about facts.

Atypical is a factual description. It means, "not typical." A quality in a population shared by 10% of the members is unarguably atypical. Left-handedness? Atypical. Homosexuality? Atypical. IQs higher than 120 or lower than 80? Atypical. Being 7' tall? Atypical.

Normality is a judgment about the way things should be. It is not a factual concept. Indeed, the origin of the word "normal" is the same as "normative." which is expressly a concept about value judgments. And perhaps you've heard of social norms, which are informal rules that people are expected to follow because they are supposedly virtuous. All of this amounts to the same thing.

This is not controversial. This is my last post on the subject because, as I anticipated, you're unwilling to admit that you used the wrong word. Should it be considered a personal failing that you confused "atypical" with "abnormal"? It should not. I worked for a well-regarded appeals court judge who confused "effect" and "affect." It meant he made a mistake, not that he was an idiot. Alas. Neurologists talk of a testosterone response to being wrong. Some men in particular experience a drop in T after losing an argument, which is a fancy way of saying that you're thinking with your testes.

Finally, other posters have given you examples of situations involving atypicality that are never described as abnormal. I'll do one better. Lebron James and Michael Jordan are among the most atypical people on the planet. To be blessed with the size, athleticism, drive, skills, coordination, intelligence that they have is indeed extraordinary. It's not simply that they are the two best players in NBA history; they are pretty far above #3. I've never once heard them described as "abnormal." Have you? And to extend the point, NBA players themselves are highly atypical people. The vast majority of them are exceptionally tall compared to the average person, and they have other distinguishing factors. Have you ever heard them referred to as abnormal?

"This is my last post on the subject because, as I anticipated, you're unwilling to admit that you used the wrong word."

The fact that several people, I suspect all of similar political views, don't like the word abnormal being used, doesn't mean it's "wrong". It may not be nice and the aforementioned people may be concerned about the feelings of those being described as abnormal, but there is no doubt, in nature, there are norms when it comes to gender, attraction and procreation and homosexuals fall outside of those norms.

 

[ZenMode]

nonsense.

arguing that Oxford and Merriam Webster are wrong and you're actually right about what words mean is definitely a winning argument.

just a stunning lack of self awareness.

I never said the dictionary definitions were wrong. Typical isn't always. Abnormal can be used in a positive way. A basketball player can be abnormally tall. A gifted student can be abnormally intelligent, etc.

 

[finesse]

I never said the dictionary definitions were wrong. Typical isn't always. Abnormal can be used in a positive way. A basketball player can be abnormally tall. A gifted student can be abnormally intelligent, etc.

How often would it be expressed like that outside of ,possibly, a clinical sense? Would you use that in conversation with someone else? Would you directly ,especially to the basketball player?

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

I wonder if any of the posters spending near 30 pages arguing why their bans were wrong... realize that in the world of unpaid message board moderating, I'd almost guarantee an unspoken part of the decision to give somebody a lifetime ban is knowing that you will never have to argue with this particular poster again who is psychologically incapable of backing down and admitting he is wrong... and will continue arguing for the rest of his life rather than risk having to do so.

I was asked a couple times to become a moderator. This thread reminds me why I refused. The length that some people will go to prove they are right and the rest of the world is wrong... makes me want to kill puppies.

 

[heel79]

I wonder if any of the posters spending near 30 pages arguing why their bans were wrong... realize that in the world of unpaid message board moderating, I'd almost guarantee an unspoken part of the decision to give somebody a lifetime ban is knowing that you will never have to argue with this particular poster again who is psychologically incapable of backing down and admitting he is wrong... and will continue arguing for the rest of his life rather than risk having to do so.

I was asked a couple times to become a moderator. This thread reminds me why I refused. The length that some people will go to prove they are right and the rest of the world is wrong... makes me want to kill puppies.

How many posters have actually complained? Handful? Isn't that what snoop invited? And isn't there just as much effort by those arguing why the bans were fair and vice versa? I mean that is the nature of the thread.

 

[NOVAHEEL13]

Careful, you will summon him and then the board will be in for a world of hurt. He's basically un-moderate-able, and has been banned in some capacity from every board on which I've encountered him (more than just IC and the BoB), and it's NEVER his fault. Just ask him.

Yeah, rand, fish and Dan are message board plagues on a biblical scale.